Muhammad Cartoon Controversy (1 Viewer)

[mr EaZy]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

For someone who is meant to be reasonably bright you seem to have a problem when it comes to different notions of belief (or lack thereof).

wats the prob? please enlighten me so that ill be more brighter next time

i dont think that what you say is true because i am in fact more tolerant than you are of christian beliefs! by that i mean i dont feel sick when i hear carols in the domain lol!


please note that i dont take u as infidels- the latin meaning "o ye without faith" that term doesnt exist in islam....

but for more info go to the 22nd audio title on the LHS of this site:

http://nadeem.lightuponlight.com/indexaudios1.html#Hamza_Yusuf

- intellectual stuff...

for the record- i am against athiests who think that they alone possess the keys to intellect and reason and that they have the right to undermine the establishments of religions, and have the right to challenge what others hold as sacred - if they wish to do it amongst themselves thats fine- but going to people's homes and countries and spreading it there is just a hopeless cause-

i dont see athiesm as a state of faithlessness- i see it as its own relgion. the way not that bright defends athiesm when i criticize it- i cant tell the difference between him (in that state ) and a follower of any other religion. just my opinion- ill elaborate later (when i come back) i may not have been clear just then

 

[mr EaZy]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

media file is called : what muslims believe in- its actually a debate/discussion with a professor of religious studies/ priest.

 

[firehose]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Haha, stopped right there. If this blogger thinks there wasn't any expression of outrage in the Muslim community in response to 9/11, he/she needs a reality check.

Yes, but you have to admit that the sense of outrage following 9/11 was nowhere near as dramatic as this. Moreover, the sense of outrage was left to Muslim leaders in televised statements, not from public protests. In fact, I distinctly remember how Palestinians danced in the streets in jubilation after they heard how the planes hit the towers.

 

[ihavenothing]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

for the record- i am against athiests who think that they alone possess the keys to intellect and reason and that they have the right to undermine the establishments of religions, and have the right to challenge what others hold as sacred - if they wish to do it amongst themselves thats fine- but going to people's homes and countries and spreading it there is just a hopeless cause-

i dont see athiesm as a state of faithlessness- i see it as its own relgion. the way not that bright defends athiesm when i criticize it- i cant tell the difference between him (in that state ) and a follower of any other religion. just my opinion- ill elaborate later (when i come back) i may not have been clear just then

How can you see atheism as a religion, it is the opposite of that. I don't see people evangelising athiesm, either. People like me (who prefer to choose the word non-religious) just see religion as an organised belief system that feel under its requirements I have a right as a human being not to follow any without guilt or shame.

As with criticism of religions, I dont see religion as anything not equal to an ideology such as communism, Nazism or any -ism that we should be able in a secular country as something that is not completely 100% based on true fact and we should be able to critique it and its practice and compare.

If you are unable to see this difference, it is good example of your brainwashing and closed mind to other ways of thinking.

 

[tempco]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Yes, but you have to admit that the sense of outrage following 9/11 was nowhere near as dramatic as this. Moreover, the sense of outrage was left to Muslim leaders in televised statements, not from public protests. In fact, I distinctly remember how Palestinians danced in the streets in jubilation after they heard how the planes hit the towers.

Hmm, so Palestinians danced when 9/11 happened. Palestinians threated some EU building over the pictures. Pattern, anyone?

And do you really think public protests were suited to the 9/11 tragedy? Sounds a bit off to me.

 

[Generator]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

i dont think that what you say is true because i am in fact more tolerant than you are of christian beliefs! by that i mean i dont feel sick when i hear carols in the domain lol!

Huh? Why would I feel sick whenever I hear Christmas carols? Though I cannot remember saying as much, yes, I do not like the Carols in the Domain, but I fail to see how that they can be taken as being indicative of a degree of intolerance. After all, I am sure that there are many Chirstians who cannot stand the way in which the carols are presented. Personally, I just don't like the singers (bar the Wiggles, if they happen to be on) or the corny nature of the broadcast.

For the record, though you may tolerate what is different, that isn't to say that you actually know what it is that you are tolerating. For example, you seem to be unable to grasp the difference between athiesm and agnosticism - not all who criticise different notions of faith consider themselves to be athiests (nor are they necessarily an athiest or agnostic).

please note that i dont take u as infidels- the latin meaning "o ye without faith" that term doesnt exist in islam....

but for more info go to the 22nd audio title on the LHS of this site:

http://nadeem.lightuponlight.com/indexaudios1.html#Hamza_Yusuf

I know. Some on this forum may take their comments too far (believe it or not, but I find sasha's comments to be just as annoying as those posted by members such as simpson freak), but you have never been one to go to such lengths.

for the record- i am against athiests who think that they alone possess the keys to intellect and reason and that they have the right to undermine the establishments of religions, and have the right to challenge what others hold as sacred - if they wish to do it amongst themselves thats fine- but going to people's homes and countries and spreading it there is just a hopeless cause-

If your faith is so strong and 'logical', then shouldn't it be able to hold its own against such people? If it does provide all the answers that many seem to claim, then shouldn't such challenges be meaningless?

For the record, people of all persuasions take the time to undermine what they consider to be incorrect in the hope that others will see what they consider to be 'the light' (for want of a better term). Such criticisms are to be expected and welcomed, because if your faith (or lack thereof) cannot withstand such questions*, then why would you consider such a frame of mind to be both correct and worthy of your time?

i dont see athiesm as a state of faithlessness- i see it as its own relgion. the way not that bright defends athiesm when i criticize it- i cant tell the difference between him (in that state ) and a follower of any other religion. just my opinion- ill elaborate later (when i come back) i may not have been clear just then

It isn't a religion.

NTB may come across as being over zealous at times, but I think that that is to be expected when many of the questions that he poses are quite often ignored in favour of more easily defended points of contention. Address the questions and respond in a logical manner and I am sure that few would have a problem with NTB.


*A question doesn't necessarily need an immediate answer (e.g., how was the universe created?) in order to be considered, and, though a number of people do not agree, 'it was god' alone should not be considered a suitable answer.

 

[volition]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

exercise your freedom: http://www.drawmohammed.com/

 

[mr EaZy]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Huh? Why would I feel sick whenever I hear Christmas carols? Though I cannot remember saying as much, yes, I do not like the Carols in the Domain, but I fail to see how that they can be taken as being indicative of a degree of intolerance. After all, I am sure that there are many Chirstians who cannot stand the way in which the carols are presented. Personally, I just don't like the singers (bar the Wiggles, if they happen to be on) or the corny nature of the broadcast.

then please explain your position on the thread on the christian carols - the one where you had to vote based on your faith.

For the record, though you may tolerate what is different, that isn't to say that you actually know what it is that you are tolerating. For example, you seem to be unable to grasp the difference between athiesm and agnosticism - not all who criticise different notions of faith consider themselves to be athiests (nor are they necessarily an athiest or agnostic).

i have only been at odds with those on this forum who public announce their opposition to religion and to the existence of God and thereafter criticize muslims based on the actions of other muslims.

lets face it- some atheists on this forum are intolerant of people with a belief in God for the only reason that they dont believe in God themselves.

If your faith is so strong and 'logical', then shouldn't it be able to hold its own against such people? If it does provide all the answers that many seem to claim, then shouldn't such challenges be meaningless?

islam does hold out against the arguments of atheists, agnostics and people of other beliefs - and muslims have been challenging such people for over a thousand years.

my problem is with the people who identify themselves as diests and atheists who target non practicing or uneducated members of religions and try to get them to jump ship for no apparent reason other than the fact that they cant tolerate such people in the first place!

Ive been to their websites- they try and get diests and athiests to fund their projects of undermining religious establishments in the USA - mainly the church. so they call u up- do a survey and ask questions like: how strong are you in your beliefs that christ is the son of god? stuff like that. its not about attacking the logic of such people- its about the idea that if your not religious- your better off being an atheist...

For the record, people of all persuasions take the time to undermine what they consider to be incorrect in the hope that others will see what they consider to be 'the light' (for want of a better term). Such criticisms are to be expected and welcomed, because if your faith (or lack thereof) cannot withstand such questions*, then why would you consider such a frame of mind to be both correct and worthy of your time?

tru

It isn't a religion.

what is a religion?

NTB may come across as being over zealous at times, but I think that that is to be expected when many of the questions that he poses are quite often ignored in favour of more easily defended points of contention. Address the questions and respond in a logical manner and I am sure that few would have a problem with NTB.

no i was talking about how he responds when i attack atheist personality

*A question doesn't necessarily need an immediate answer (e.g., how was the universe created?) in order to be considered, and, though a number of people do not agree, 'it was god' alone should not be considered a suitable answer.

To answer that question- the Quran doesnt just say it was God. I dont even agree with intelligent design because it puts a limit to science. The Quran might ask us to ponder about natual phenomena so that we can come up with the answers or it might state facts.

But one of the things i think people forget is that science is not all about facts. its more about perceptions and conjectures of facts. We use models that explain phenomena of science but it doesnt capture every single property of the phenomena. Take the periodic table for example... its useful in explaining the known properties of atoms but when your delve inside the nuclei and the way in which atoms spins, anti spin, etc, which was all documented last century- we are going into things that scientists are not 100% sure of- but the text books that you study in HS or uni might present them as facts- which is technically untrue. A scottish scientist has successfully challenged the notion of absolute knowledge- just keep that in mind. (im talking about metaphysical science)

 

[tempco]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

exercise your freedom: http://www.drawmohammed.com/

The actual drawing of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) isn't/shouldn't be the issue. It's haram (forbidden), but the person who drew the cartoons was not a Muslim. The nature of the cartoons are/should be the problem.

 

[volition]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

The actual drawing of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) isn't/shouldn't be the issue. It's haram (forbidden), but the person who drew the cartoons was not a Muslim. The nature of the cartoons are/should be the problem.

I suggest you take a look at the nature of the cartoons on that site then

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=73404120&p=734x44zz
“The only way this will be resolved, is if those who are responsible are turned over so they can be punished by Islamic law, so that they can be executed,” said Abu Ibraheem, 26, from Luton.

“There are no apologies ….Those responsible would have to be killed.”

This is the kind of attitude that people shouldn't have.

 

[tempco]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

I suggest you take a look at the nature of the cartoons on that site then

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=73404120&p=734x44zz
“The only way this will be resolved, is if those who are responsible are turned over so they can be punished by Islamic law, so that they can be executed,” said Abu Ibraheem, 26, from Luton.

“There are no apologies ….Those responsible would have to be killed.”

This is the kind of attitude that people shouldn't have.

I've seen the cartoons. Some of them are pretty lame... still offensive though. As for punishment, that guy has no idea what he's going on about.

 

[mr EaZy]

Praising the Prophet Muhammad, and our world views

This is understandable - we do the same thing for many of our respected citizens. For judges we call them "your honour", etc.

Although, we respect them for their contributions to society, not for religious reasons...

dont be soo naiieve. that statement is of varying truth in here and the USA. A report this year also cast doubt on the integrity on judicial appointments- ill try to get it if u want but i prob threw it away. US judges are popularly elected.

we praise the prophet Muhammad because Allah praises him in the Quran and that HE has ordered us to praise the prophet as he deserves to be praised- so its a religious thing in the sense that we get rewarded for what we say.

Now we dont just blindly praise anybody- part of our understanding of islam is that we understand the contributions that the great and noble prophet did for society and humanity in general. WE are not alone in this... You can ask Jews like Jules Masserman or Christians like Geroge Bernard Shaw and others and they will also praise the prophet more than what you say to the judges "your honor"

You praise judges in front of them- but what is the possibility that every litigant comes before a judge knowing the contributions the judge did for society? none- its institutionalised and the very negative of what you were trying to suggest.

At the moment islam and christianity are the only relgions with a sense of universality about them. Islam is unique in that it had this notion from day one. So you can see to what extent Muhammad played in transforming the perceptions of muslims to the world around them.

referring to my management text book- it quotes Therborn. G from the journal: international sociology on contemporary globalisation (2000).

The guy checked the major dictionaries of the 1980s of German, French, English and other European and Asian languages.

this is the 1980s- and we find that the European dictionaries didnt have one word that connoted a sense of globalisation. The japanese had one term for business globalisation... but the arabic language had 4 words that connoted the notion.

So you all have to check your own built in notions of this world. Its much bigger than yourselves


You will have to examine this with Heideger's philosophy- the idea of throness- we are born into cultures: eg: you were born here... in a christia/athiest society/family, with the language of English- this is very significant to who you are and you have to recognise not just this - but that other people have been raised in other countries with other philosophies and religions underpinningt\ their society... and until we all question why we behave the way we behave and travel to countries that would challenge our accepted notions - then there will be no way fully understanding who we really are and not just what our society has wanted us to be.

Muhammad was a man who recognised this and this is why he was challenged by the power brokers of his society who hated what he was doing. the arabs were into female infanticide and stuff liek that - he was against that... and it is surprising that female infanticide in recent times has been on the increase with the advantage of untrasound in 2nd world countries.

What we recognise as Great in Muhammad was his determination to rid society of these evils and strive to create a utopia that would rival the romans. It takes great strenght to maintain such a struggle for over 10 years, to be just, to maintain a high standard of character...

But above that Muhammad was also a king and a judge- now he didnt wear a crown or a wig like how we view such officials but thats what he was

if you want to study islamic contracts -you look at how he judged between people from across arabia- interstate contracts, simple or complex, trusts etc... the islamic state was the first to allow females the rights of inheritance, a right to legally divorce, a right to be looked after(enforceable in court- not even we have this law ) - now the english didnt have this not even 600 years later... so he brought reforms hundreds of years before his time... and you cannot deny the greatness of what he did... surely i havent come across a person of respectable academic credentials doing such a thing.

 

[ihavenothing]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

I suggest you take a look at the nature of the cartoons on that site then

http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/story.asp?j=73404120&p=734x44zz
“The only way this will be resolved, is if those who are responsible are turned over so they can be punished by Islamic law, so that they can be executed,” said Abu Ibraheem, 26, from Luton.

“There are no apologies ….Those responsible would have to be killed.”

This is the kind of attitude that people shouldn't have.

Fuck oath.

I guess this whole saga has opened up a can of worms for Muslims as now non-Muslims have been enlightened in that the religion CAN and SHOULD be criticised.

 

[tempco]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Fuck oath.

I guess this whole saga has opened up a can of worms for Muslims as now non-Muslims have been enlightened in that the religion CAN and SHOULD be criticised.

Not really. It's been open for the past _______.

 

[firehose]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Hmm, so Palestinians danced when 9/11 happened. Palestinians threated some EU building over the pictures. Pattern, anyone?

And do you really think public protests were suited to the 9/11 tragedy? Sounds a bit off to me.

Does the publishing of cartoons caricaturing Mohammed compare to the 9/11 tragedy? Go back and read all the occurrences on that blog entry and compare it to the Danish drawings. As revered as the prophet is, the loss of innocent life - as well as the demand for loss of life in response to the cartoons - is unjustified.

It would be wiser if more Muslims reacted to this situation with calm, rather than mass protests, death threats and the general inciting of more hatred.

 

[banco55]

Re: Praising the Prophet Muhammad, and our world views

dont be soo naiieve. that statement is of varying truth in here and the USA. A report this year also cast doubt on the integrity on judicial appointments- ill try to get it if u want but i prob threw it away. US judges are popularly elected.

we praise the prophet Muhammad because Allah praises him in the Quran and that HE has ordered us to praise the prophet as he deserves to be praised- so its a religious thing in the sense that we get rewarded for what we say.

Now we dont just blindly praise anybody- part of our understanding of islam is that we understand the contributions that the great and noble prophet did for society and humanity in general. WE are not alone in this... You can ask Jews like Jules Masserman or Christians like Geroge Bernard Shaw and others and they will also praise the prophet more than what you say to the judges "your honor"

You praise judges in front of them- but what is the possibility that every litigant comes before a judge knowing the contributions the judge did for society? none- its institutionalised and the very negative of what you were trying to suggest.

At the moment islam and christianity are the only relgions with a sense of universality about them. Islam is unique in that it had this notion from day one. So you can see to what extent Muhammad played in transforming the perceptions of muslims to the world around them.

referring to my management text book- it quotes Therborn. G from the journal: international sociology on contemporary globalisation (2000).

The guy checked the major dictionaries of the 1980s of German, French, English and other European and Asian languages.

this is the 1980s- and we find that the European dictionaries didnt have one word that connoted a sense of globalisation. The japanese had one term for business globalisation... but the arabic language had 4 words that connoted the notion.

So you all have to check your own built in notions of this world. Its much bigger than yourselves


You will have to examine this with Heideger's philosophy- the idea of throness- we are born into cultures: eg: you were born here... in a christia/athiest society/family, with the language of English- this is very significant to who you are and you have to recognise not just this - but that other people have been raised in other countries with other philosophies and religions underpinningt\ their society... and until we all question why we behave the way we behave and travel to countries that would challenge our accepted notions - then there will be no way fully understanding who we really are and not just what our society has wanted us to be.

Muhammad was a man who recognised this and this is why he was challenged by the power brokers of his society who hated what he was doing. the arabs were into female infanticide and stuff liek that - he was against that... and it is surprising that female infanticide in recent times has been on the increase with the advantage of untrasound in 2nd world countries.

What we recognise as Great in Muhammad was his determination to rid society of these evils and strive to create a utopia that would rival the romans. It takes great strenght to maintain such a struggle for over 10 years, to be just, to maintain a high standard of character...

But above that Muhammad was also a king and a judge- now he didnt wear a crown or a wig like how we view such officials but thats what he was

if you want to study islamic contracts -you look at how he judged between people from across arabia- interstate contracts, simple or complex, trusts etc... the islamic state was the first to allow females the rights of inheritance, a right to legally divorce, a right to be looked after(enforceable in court- not even we have this law ) - now the english didnt have this not even 600 years later... so he brought reforms hundreds of years before his time... and you cannot deny the greatness of what he did... surely i havent come across a person of respectable academic credentials doing such a thing.

If you follow Heidegger's thought to it's logical conclusion it's hard to believe in any religion though. That's why Heidegger's turn towards Nazism was consistent with his philosophy. He realized the old gods were dead and saw nazism as possibly offering a substitute for religion.

 

[tempco]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

Does the publishing of cartoons caricaturing Mohammed compare to the 9/11 tragedy?

I was emphasising on the reactions of a certain group to two completely different events. That was the point.

Go back and read all the occurrences on that blog entry and compare it to the Danish drawings. As revered as the prophet is, the loss of innocent life - as well as the demand for loss of life in response to the cartoons - is unjustified.

Obviously.

It would be wiser if more Muslims reacted to this situation with calm, rather than mass protests, death threats and the general inciting of more hatred.

True... I mean most protests end up having the Israeli flag being burt. But then again, you don't see Muslims who write letters of complaint to newspapers and governments splashed across the TV and newspapers.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Re: Praising the Prophet Muhammad, and our world views

This is understandable - we do the same thing for many of our respected citizens. For judges we call them "your honour", etc.

Although, we respect them for their contributions to society, not for religious reasons...

dont be soo naiieve.

lol. Well that's a new one. "Naive" isn't a word often attributed to me, I must say.

There's no need to be so presumptuous, particularly when you're alleging something improbable. Indeed, with respect, the chances are that my knowledge of the judiciary is far superior to yours.

that statement is of varying truth in here and the USA. A report this year also cast doubt on the integrity on judicial appointments- ill try to get it if u want but i prob threw it away. US judges are popularly elected.

1. I mentioned "we", being Australia. Your remarks on US judges are irrelevant.

2. You claim that there has been criticism of the method of appointing judges. Again, irrelevant. My claim was that one of the reasons judges are addressed as "your honour" is because of their important contribution to society. The extent to which they actually do contribute is neither here nor there.

3. Notwithstanding point two, judges do play an important role in society. Aside from their decisions regarding private matters between citizens, there is no denying the fact that judges allow one of the most fundamental parts of our system of government function properly.

4. You make a vague reference to a report dealing with the integrity of judicial appointments. Without seeing the report, or even hearing an argument from the report, such remarks are utterly useless.

we praise the prophet Muhammad because Allah praises him in the Quran and that HE has ordered us to praise the prophet as he deserves to be praised- so its a religious thing in the sense that we get rewarded for what we say.

That is exactly what I implied --

Although, we respect them for their contributions to society, not for religious reasons...

You just agreed that you praise him for religious reasons. I don't see how my point is incorrect.

Now we dont just blindly praise anybody- part of our understanding of islam is that we understand the contributions that the great and noble prophet did for society and humanity in general. WE are not alone in this... You can ask Jews like Jules Masserman or Christians like Geroge Bernard Shaw and others and they will also praise the prophet more than what you say to the judges "your honor"

Okay, now you have a more credible argument.

Your argument is, "We praise Muhammad for religious reasons and because of his contribution to society."

Even so, my assertion was that we don't address judges as "your honour" for religious reasons, but because of their contribution to society. So it still stands.

You praise judges in front of them- but what is the possibility that every litigant comes before a judge knowing the contributions the judge did for society? none- its institutionalised and the very negative of what you were trying to suggest.

It doesn't matter what every single litigant believes. Just because someone (or a number of people) believes something doesn't make it true. Besides, anyone with any knowledge of what judges do knows that judges contribute to society. If they don't know, in general, what judges do then they are a poorly informed citizen. The institutions which demand this of us are not governed by poorly informed citizens.

At the moment islam and christianity are the only relgions with a sense of universality about them. Islam is unique in that it had this notion from day one. So you can see to what extent Muhammad played in transforming the perceptions of muslims to the world around them.

No idea what you are talking about here, and obviously how it is relevant.

referring to my management text book- it quotes Therborn. G from the journal: international sociology on contemporary globalisation (2000).

The guy checked the major dictionaries of the 1980s of German, French, English and other European and Asian languages.

this is the 1980s- and we find that the European dictionaries didnt have one word that connoted a sense of globalisation. The japanese had one term for business globalisation... but the arabic language had 4 words that connoted the notion.

So you all have to check your own built in notions of this world. Its much bigger than yourselves

Of course. No-one is suggesting otherwise.

You will have to examine this with Heideger's philosophy- the idea of throness- we are born into cultures: eg: you were born here... in a christia/athiest society/family, with the language of English- this is very significant to who you are and you have to recognise not just this - but that other people have been raised in other countries with other philosophies and religions underpinningt\ their society... and until we all question why we behave the way we behave and travel to countries that would challenge our accepted notions - then there will be no way fully understanding who we really are and not just what our society has wanted us to be.

There is some truth in this, but it would be grossly incorrect to allege that "until we have been to other countries and experienced their cultures then we cannot falsify their arguments or beliefs".

Muhammad was a man who recognised this and this is why he was challenged by the power brokers of his society who hated what he was doing. the arabs were into female infanticide and stuff liek that - he was against that... and it is surprising that female infanticide in recent times has been on the increase with the advantage of untrasound in 2nd world countries.

What we recognise as Great in Muhammad was his determination to rid society of these evils and strive to create a utopia that would rival the romans. It takes great strenght to maintain such a struggle for over 10 years, to be just, to maintain a high standard of character...

This is just reiterating your point that Muhammad contributed to society. I talked about that above.

But above that Muhammad was also a king and a judge- now he didnt wear a crown or a wig like how we view such officials but thats what he was

if you want to study islamic contracts -you look at how he judged between people from across arabia- interstate contracts, simple or complex, trusts etc... the islamic state was the first to allow females the rights of inheritance, a right to legally divorce, a right to be looked after(enforceable in court- not even we have this law ) - now the english didnt have this not even 600 years later... so he brought reforms hundreds of years before his time... and you cannot deny the greatness of what he did... surely i havent come across a person of respectable academic credentials doing such a thing.

More of the same point. Discussed above.

 

[SashatheMan]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

i bring you , an update on the the peaceful religion and london

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004448.htm

 

[banco55]

Re: Jihad Against Danish Newspaper

i bring you , an update on the the peaceful religion and london

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004448.htm

Isn't multiculturalism beautiful?